{"id":49283551,"url":"https://github.com/buildingopen/openbird","last_synced_at":"2026-04-25T20:03:23.182Z","repository":{"id":352781416,"uuid":"1216598553","full_name":"buildingopen/openbird","owner":"buildingopen","description":"Airlines reject 80% of valid EC 261 claims. openbird fights back. Claude Code skills for EU air passenger rights.","archived":false,"fork":false,"pushed_at":"2026-04-21T04:21:54.000Z","size":63,"stargazers_count":0,"open_issues_count":0,"forks_count":0,"subscribers_count":0,"default_branch":"main","last_synced_at":"2026-04-21T06:17:17.736Z","etag":null,"topics":["aesa","airline-rights","claude-code","ec261","eu-regulation","flight-compensation","mcp","passenger-rights"],"latest_commit_sha":null,"homepage":"https://github.com/buildingopen/openbird","language":"JavaScript","has_issues":true,"has_wiki":null,"has_pages":null,"mirror_url":null,"source_name":null,"license":"mit","status":null,"scm":"git","pull_requests_enabled":true,"icon_url":"https://github.com/buildingopen.png","metadata":{"files":{"readme":"README.md","changelog":null,"contributing":null,"funding":null,"license":"LICENSE","code_of_conduct":null,"threat_model":null,"audit":null,"citation":null,"codeowners":null,"security":null,"support":null,"governance":null,"roadmap":null,"authors":null,"dei":null,"publiccode":null,"codemeta":null,"zenodo":null,"notice":null,"maintainers":null,"copyright":null,"agents":null,"dco":null,"cla":null}},"created_at":"2026-04-21T04:04:27.000Z","updated_at":"2026-04-21T04:21:58.000Z","dependencies_parsed_at":null,"dependency_job_id":null,"html_url":"https://github.com/buildingopen/openbird","commit_stats":null,"previous_names":["buildingopen/openbird"],"tags_count":null,"template":false,"template_full_name":null,"purl":"pkg:github/buildingopen/openbird","repository_url":"https://repos.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/hosts/GitHub/repositories/buildingopen%2Fopenbird","tags_url":"https://repos.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/hosts/GitHub/repositories/buildingopen%2Fopenbird/tags","releases_url":"https://repos.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/hosts/GitHub/repositories/buildingopen%2Fopenbird/releases","manifests_url":"https://repos.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/hosts/GitHub/repositories/buildingopen%2Fopenbird/manifests","owner_url":"https://repos.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/hosts/GitHub/owners/buildingopen","download_url":"https://codeload.github.com/buildingopen/openbird/tar.gz/refs/heads/main","sbom_url":"https://repos.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/hosts/GitHub/repositories/buildingopen%2Fopenbird/sbom","scorecard":null,"host":{"name":"GitHub","url":"https://github.com","kind":"github","repositories_count":286080680,"owners_count":32274987,"icon_url":"https://github.com/github.png","version":null,"created_at":"2022-05-30T11:31:42.601Z","updated_at":"2026-04-25T18:29:39.964Z","status":"ssl_error","status_checked_at":"2026-04-25T18:29:32.149Z","response_time":59,"last_error":"SSL_read: unexpected eof while reading","robots_txt_status":"success","robots_txt_updated_at":"2025-07-24T06:49:26.215Z","robots_txt_url":"https://github.com/robots.txt","online":false,"can_crawl_api":true,"host_url":"https://repos.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/hosts/GitHub","repositories_url":"https://repos.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/hosts/GitHub/repositories","repository_names_url":"https://repos.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/hosts/GitHub/repository_names","owners_url":"https://repos.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/hosts/GitHub/owners"}},"keywords":["aesa","airline-rights","claude-code","ec261","eu-regulation","flight-compensation","mcp","passenger-rights"],"created_at":"2026-04-25T20:03:19.455Z","updated_at":"2026-04-25T20:03:23.164Z","avatar_url":"https://github.com/buildingopen.png","language":"JavaScript","funding_links":[],"categories":[],"sub_categories":[],"readme":"\u003c!-- meta: openbird — Claude Code skills for EU flight compensation under EC 261/2004. Analyze airline rejections, counter bad legal arguments, claim €250–€600. Works with AESA and ECC-Net. --\u003e\n\n\u003cp align=\"center\"\u003e\n  \u003cimg src=\"assets/banner.svg\" alt=\"openbird — EU Air Passenger Rights\" width=\"100%\"/\u003e\n\u003c/p\u003e\n\n\u003cp align=\"center\"\u003e\n  \u003ca href=\"https://www.npmjs.com/package/@buildingopen/openbird\"\u003e\u003cimg src=\"https://img.shields.io/npm/v/@buildingopen/openbird.svg?style=flat-square\u0026color=1f6feb\" alt=\"npm version\"/\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\n  \u003ca href=\"https://pypi.org/project/openbird/\"\u003e\u003cimg src=\"https://img.shields.io/pypi/v/openbird.svg?style=flat-square\u0026color=1f6feb\" alt=\"PyPI version\"/\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\n  \u003ca href=\"LICENSE\"\u003e\u003cimg src=\"https://img.shields.io/badge/License-MIT-blue.svg?style=flat-square\" alt=\"MIT License\"/\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\n  \u003cimg src=\"https://img.shields.io/badge/EC%20261%2F2004-binding%20EU%20law-green.svg?style=flat-square\" alt=\"EC 261/2004\"/\u003e\n\u003c/p\u003e\n\n\u003cbr/\u003e\n\n# openbird\n\n\u003e Airlines reject ~80% of valid EC 261/2004 claims hoping passengers give up. openbird doesn't give up.\n\nAirlines are billion-dollar corporations with legal teams. Every rejection letter is written to sound authoritative enough that you'll stop. Most passengers do. openbird gives you the legal precision to push back — it installs Claude Code skills that know EC 261/2004 article by article, identify the exact error in your rejection letter, and tell you what to file, where, and why you'll win.\n\n**This is not a form-filling service.** It's legal firepower in your terminal.\n\n---\n\n## What you're owed ⚖️\n\nUnder **EC Regulation 261/2004**, when your flight is cancelled or significantly delayed:\n\n| Route | Compensation per passenger |\n|---|---|\n| ✈️ Flights ≤ 1,500 km | **€250** |\n| 🇪🇺 Intra-EU flights \u003e 1,500 km | **€400** |\n| 🌍 Non-EU flights 1,500 – 3,500 km | **€400** |\n| 🌐 All other flights (intercontinental, \u003e 3,500 km) | **€600** |\n\nPlus **Art. 9 care costs** — hotel, meals, transport — owed regardless of cause. Even if the airline claims extraordinary circumstances. Even if they say the weather made it unavoidable. You are still owed care.\n\n\u003e **Applies to:** any flight departing an EU airport (any airline), OR arriving at an EU airport on an EU carrier.\n\n---\n\n## See it in action\n\n\u003cp align=\"center\"\u003e\n  \u003cimg src=\"assets/demo.svg\" alt=\"openbird /analyze-rejection demo\" width=\"100%\"/\u003e\n\u003c/p\u003e\n\n*Real analysis of a real rejection tactic. The airline claimed \"you arrived earlier, so no compensation.\" That argument is only valid for delay claims (Art. 6). The flight was cancelled. Art. 5 applies. The passenger was owed €600.*\n\n---\n\n## Quick start (30 seconds)\n\n```bash\nnpx @buildingopen/openbird install\n```\n\nThat's it. Skills are copied into `.claude/skills/`. Open Claude Code in any project directory and the commands are live.\n\n```bash\n# Or with pip\npip install openbird \u0026\u0026 openbird install\n\n# Or clone directly\ngit clone https://github.com/buildingopen/openbird \u0026\u0026 cd openbird \u0026\u0026 claude\n```\n\nThen in Claude Code:\n\n```\n/analyze-rejection\n/file-claim\n/escalate\n```\n\n---\n\n## Skills\n\n| Command | What it does | When to use |\n|---|---|---|\n| `/analyze-rejection` | Paste your rejection letter. Claude identifies every legal error, gives a VALID/INVALID verdict, and cites the exact articles the airline got wrong. | You have a rejection and want to know if you have a case. |\n| `/file-claim` | Drafts a formal claim letter with correct article citations, calculated compensation amounts, and a 14-day ultimatum. | First contact or following up after a rejection. |\n| `/escalate` | Identifies the right enforcement authority (AESA, ECC-Net, LBA, CAA) and prepares your complaint filing. | The airline has ignored you or rejected you twice. |\n\n---\n\n## Real case\n\n**The flight:** Berlin BER → Barcelona BCN → San Francisco SFO. Marketed by LEVEL, first leg operated by Vueling.\n\n**What happened:** BER→BCN leg cancelled. Placed on a rerouted flight from a *different airport*, departing **8.5 hours before** the original.\n\n**The rejection:** *\"You arrived at your final destination earlier than scheduled. No compensation is owed.\"*\n\n**Why that's legally wrong:** That argument applies to delay claims under Art. 6. The original flight was cancelled — Art. 5 applies. Under Art. 5(1)(c)(iii), the compensation exemption requires the new departure to be no more than 1 hour before the original. 8.5 hours fails the test entirely. The airline also tried to redirect to Vueling — also wrong, because Art. 13 puts full liability on the marketing carrier (LEVEL).\n\n**The outcome:** Formal counter-letter sent. AESA ADR02 filed. ECC-Net Germany filed in parallel. Airline paid.\n\n**Amount:** €600 statutory compensation + documented care costs (hotel, meal, missed non-refundable accommodation).\n\n---\n\n## How it works\n\n```\n1. Paste rejection letter      →    2. Run /analyze-rejection    →    3. Get counter-argument\n   (any airline, any language)           (Claude identifies                + filing instructions\n                                          the legal error)                  + authority + template\n```\n\nopenbird works because airlines make the same six mistakes in rejection letters, over and over. The regulation text is precise. When the airline's argument doesn't match the text, you win — if you know which text to cite.\n\n---\n\n## Authorities covered\n\n| Authority | Country / Scope | Binding? | Best for |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| **AESA** | Spain + all Spanish carriers (Vueling, Iberia, LEVEL, Air Europa) | ✅ Yes — ADR02 | Spanish carriers regardless of departure |\n| **ECC-Net Germany** | Germany-based claimants, any EU airline | Mediation | Cross-border cases, parallel pressure |\n| **LBA** | German-registered carriers | ✅ Yes | Lufthansa, Condor, Eurowings |\n| **CAA** | UK (post-Brexit UK261) | ✅ Yes | Flights to/from UK |\n| **DGAC** | France | ✅ Yes | Air France, French departures |\n| **ENAC** | Italy | ✅ Yes | Italian carriers, Italian departures |\n| **ILT** | Netherlands | ✅ Yes | KLM, Amsterdam departures |\n\n---\n\n## Common airline rejection tactics — and why they fail\n\nAirlines have a playbook. Here are the six moves they use and the article that defeats each one:\n\n| What the airline says | Why it fails |\n|---|---|\n| \"You arrived earlier, so no compensation\" | Art. 6 logic. If the original flight didn't operate, it's Art. 5. Arrival time is irrelevant. |\n| \"Extraordinary circumstances\" | Defeats Art. 7 only. Art. 9 care (hotel, meals) is owed in all cases. |\n| \"File with the operating carrier\" | Art. 13. Marketing carrier bears full liability. Their internal arrangements with the operator are not your problem. |\n| \"You accepted the rebooking\" | Accepting the only available flight does not waive your right to compensation. |\n| \"You didn't request assistance at the airport\" | Art. 9 creates a right. The airline must offer it. You can reclaim documented costs retrospectively. |\n| \"The new flight departed less than 1h early\" | Check the actual times. Airlines frequently misstate the departure window. |\n\n---\n\n## File structure\n\n```\nopenbird/\n├── CLAUDE.md                    # Legal context loaded into every Claude session\n├── skills/\n│   ├── analyze-rejection.md     # /analyze-rejection skill\n│   ├── file-claim.md            # /file-claim skill\n│   └── escalate.md              # /escalate skill\n├── guides/\n│   ├── your-rights.md           # What EC 261/2004 actually says\n│   ├── aesa.md                  # How to file with Spain's AESA\n│   ├── eccnet.md                # How to file with ECC-Net Germany\n│   └── counter-arguments.md     # The six rejection tactics and how to defeat each\n└── templates/\n    ├── initial-claim.md         # First letter to the airline\n    ├── escalation-notice.md     # Final notice before regulatory escalation\n    └── aesa-complaint.md        # AESA ADR02 complaint text\n```\n\n---\n\n## Contributing\n\nIf you've won an EC 261/2004 case with an argument, authority, or carrier situation not covered here — open a PR. Real won cases are the most valuable content in this repo. Include: what the airline argued, what article defeated it, which authority you filed with, and the outcome.\n\n---\n\n## Disclaimer\n\nThis is practical information about a regulation that has binding legal force across the EU. It is not legal advice. The legal positions described here are drawn from the text of EC 261/2004 and from a real case — not from a lawyer. For complex or high-value claims, consult a solicitor or a no-win-no-fee claims service.\n\nThat said: airlines routinely reject valid claims because most passengers won't push back. The information here is accurate enough to push back effectively.\n\n---\n\n## License\n\nMIT — free to use, fork, and extend.\n\n---\n\n\u003cp align=\"center\"\u003e\n  \u003csub\u003eBuilt from a real case. Maintained by \u003ca href=\"https://github.com/buildingopen\"\u003ebuildingopen\u003c/a\u003e.\u003c/sub\u003e\n\u003c/p\u003e\n","project_url":"https://awesome.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/projects/github.com%2Fbuildingopen%2Fopenbird","html_url":"https://awesome.ecosyste.ms/projects/github.com%2Fbuildingopen%2Fopenbird","lists_url":"https://awesome.ecosyste.ms/api/v1/projects/github.com%2Fbuildingopen%2Fopenbird/lists"}